Results 1 - 13 of 13
|
|
|||||
Results from: Notes Author: mistknight Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Who was the one to be sacrificed? | Gen 22:12 | mistknight | 36743 | ||
I've found out for some reason that my emails aren't going... I hope the one with the file reached you, I sent it when you posted this message. I wonder why the other didn't go? Maybe the size of that file (1.5 MB)? Mist |
||||||
2 | Who was the one to be sacrificed? | Gen 22:12 | mistknight | 36742 | ||
This is the second message, read after the first. “But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye shut the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye enter not in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering in to enter. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he is become so, ye make him twofold more a son of hell than yourselves. Woe unto you, ye blind guides, that say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor. Ye fools and blind: for which is greater, the gold, or the temple that hath sanctified the gold? And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gift that is upon it, he is a debtor. Ye blind: for which is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? He therefore that sweareth by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon. And he that sweareth by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein. And he that sweareth by the heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye tithe mint and anise and cummin, and have left undone the weightier matters of the law, justice, and mercy, and faith: but these ye ought to have done, and not to have left the other undone. Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel! Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye cleanse the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full from extortion and excess. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first the inside of the cup and of the platter, that the outside thereof may become clean also. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear beautiful, but inwardly are full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but inwardly ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and garnish the tombs of the righteous, and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we should not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye witness to yourselves, that ye are sons of them that slew the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment of hell? (Matt. 23:13-33)” When you show a Christian what the majority of Muslims believe (even though some may not truly abide by it), that Islam was not born on Sep 11TH. But a whole nation shouted for its wounds to be seen, while the world closed its eyes on them, if only you knew what you did! You feel like you have done something. When I translate from the Koran to Christians they become furious, because they no longer look at the meanings, but look at the source. But don’t you know noble meanings sprout from a noble source? For no man of impure heart can write words of purity. No man of wickedness sprouts wisdom. If you fail to see this, then you never knew God. But what is it that counts, the word’s meanings, or the word’s source? When I translate from the bible to Muslims, they feel furious, but what is it that matters, the cup’s glimmer, or the cup’s drink? If you live for the glimmer, then don’t hope for pure drink. And if you live for the drink, then don’t care for the glimmer (which is dimmed by the hands of liars). When you have the power to seal your faith, you carry an unbiased opinion, and as awkward as it may sound, you gain the trust (with quite a bit of dislike lol) of everyone. When you leave no chance for a Muslim to utter blasphemy against Christians (which bothers the Muslim), and leave no chance for Christians to do likewise (which bothers the Christian), you can then feel good about yourself. When everyone reaches a level when he’s out of the darkness long enough to see the other’s beliefs flat on the table, then choose the truth they can no longer refuse, throwing uncaringly the lies they had convinced themselves of and hid behind, then will my beliefs unveil. Mist |
||||||
3 | Who was the one to be sacrificed? | Gen 22:12 | mistknight | 36741 | ||
I will reply to this with two messages, this is the first of them. Let’s assume that what you say is true. Why then hasn’t anyone beside Muhammad claimed prophecy? Why is it so that when Muhammad was offered the rule over Mecca if he leaves this religion did he reject it when he was at the utmost weakness? Why has he lived his life with many days barely finding a thing to eat? Fasting days and praying nights? Just for showoff? To get people to follow him? And living and dying the harshest of life? What did he gain from all of this beside being beaten, spat on and called crazy? Beside seeing his followers stabbed and tortured? And then, when gaining the upper hand over those who did this, he said: “Go, you are free.” I believe that God has the power to show us without the slightest doubt that what he sent was from him, not the works of humans. Then a person would no longer have “faith”, he would have “knowledge”. He would no longer “think”, he would “know”. The truth exists, but are we willing to accept it? More important, are we willing to search for it even if we believe we found it? Are we willing to throw everything we believe away so we can judge wisely in what we have between our hands? And if we find it, are we willing to show it to people as plain as it is? With the wisdom endowed to us so that we convey it smoothly? Change people’s thoughts, not only beliefs. Don’t we know that God’s words are so resistant that they neither contradict logic, mind, science, or itself? I have found this, so much that when I attempt to weaken it, it weakens me and grows stronger. If only one criteria fails, then can’t we accept that the God of infinite Wisdom did not reveal it? You must attack your beliefs from all sides, try to weaken it, if it grows stronger and weakens you. Then you have found God. But don’t lie to yourselves, don’t grant it a false victory and remain living in a lie. Remember that your decisions seal your fate and the fate of your loved ones, DON’T be so selfish! When you work with two religions you’re dealing with a two edged sword. Or as Arabs would say it, the best of which is worse. As unfortunate as it is, when someone of one faith is faced with someone of another, each of them unconsciously raise the shield of ignorance and hard-headedness. On the other hand, when you work ambiguously (without revealing you beliefs), some of what you say will be accepted, the rest will be rejected; nonetheless, although rejected and replied to harshly and insultingly, it is still heard. That’s much better than trying to communicate and being sealed off immediately. Which would stain all your efforts vain. I personally don’t like this. But when you see the few Muslims who begin to understand more about Christians, feeling a bit of compassion instead towards them, not hatred (which is not religious hatred) which built up through a lifetime, you then realize that your efforts are not in vain. “And you will find from the people most hateful to the believers (Muslims), the Jews and the Pagans. And nearest amongst them in love to those who believe are those who say: we are Christians. That is because there are amongst them people devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world for they are not arrogant (Koran 5:85)”. |
||||||
4 | Who was the one to be sacrificed? | Gen 22:12 | mistknight | 36739 | ||
I’m trying to show them the lies they believe about you, and to show you the (extremely) numerous lies you believe about them. To correct your understanding of them, and to correct their understanding of you. To teach you about them, and to teach them about you. To answer them and to answer you. But more importantly, to help them and to help you. Please read Emmaus’s last message to me and my reply. I gave a very detailed reply to it. Mist |
||||||
5 | Who was the one to be sacrificed? | Gen 22:12 | mistknight | 36417 | ||
I have told you before that I persue truth. When I see something illogical in Muslim's faith I clearly say it out loud. When they give me arguments against Christianity and I refer to you then reply to them, they tell me that this is the stance of a Christian, since none knows my personal beliefs. And they simply despise it(and me) for that matter. When I see something historically wrong on behalf of Christians I say it clear cut, again, they tell me that this is the attitude of a Muslim. They don't like me, but I hate no one. I don't seek any side's contentment for me. I simply seek the truth. If that truth offends Christians or Muslims, it nonetheless is the unchangable truth. It seems you might have overlooked that I might be someone who's searching for a faith. That would require me to question both sides, would it not? As for Christians, we know quite well that Muhammad never encountered any at the time before Hijra (before going to Madina). Jews were concentrated in Madina also. According to Muslim references (which are highly doubtful), Jews and Christians were there for the sole purpose of awaiting someone they knew would be born at that time, and around these places. Again, if we look at the text in the Koran, we can clearly see that he didn't wait until after Hijra for his revelation to start. Moreover, hundreds of verses in the Koran deal not only with belief, but with the life and span of his stay and of Arab's history. Was that also recorded in Jewish teachings? Especially that they wouldn't care more or less for the pagan Arabs? What about the names of places? What about the stories associated with prophets which are nowhere to be found in the bible? If we accept what you said, we might just be questioning what reached us from the bible, and from what was usually concidered then as bible. Not convinced? Let's not forget that Jews in particular hold the belief that Jewdism is their religion only, and that they are exalted above gentiles. It would be highly questionable that one of them would go out of his way to teach a gentile his most holliest teachings when he knows that it would not even give salvation to him (assuming he could find a Jew in Mecca). Let's not forget also that Jews were from the few who refused the new religion, they couldn't have then seen it very much like their own religions would they? What does all this tell you? Logic my friend. When I translate a verse of the Koran and it says the Koran is divine revelation, or offends trinity. Then can you honestly say that this is what I I'm saying? Not what the verses honestly say when translated? Which I use only to show you what a Muslim would say to what he would concider very weak arguments. If I choose to take out such parts which offend the trinity or say that the Koran is divine, then I don't think the text can still be called part of the Koran?Perhaps the Koran revised and edited by a Christian. If I don't even state the verses, then I would be called ignorant for not knowing anything about the faith and it's replies to the attacks at hand. Would that be an "objective" reply to you? Logic my friend. Mist |
||||||
6 | Who was the one to be sacrificed? | Gen 22:12 | mistknight | 36372 | ||
I had to read only the first few pages. But I will openly attack something so weakly woven. First of all, the Koran itself refuted the claim that this is taken from Jewdism or Christianity. "and they say, this(The Koran) is dictated to him day and night, the tongue of the one you say of (a scribe) is foreign, and this is in the most fluent Arabic" I'm sure you know of the flaws of translation. Do you think a work translated from any other language to Arabic could possibly dare to hold this challenge? "All you humans and Jinns, if you are in doubt of that which we have sent to our servant then come up with only one chapter like the ones inside it and call whoever you wish for support if you tell the truth. But if you do not, and surly you cannot, then fear a fire whose fuel is men and stones prepared for the disbelievers" Do know that the smallest chapter in the Koran was only one line long! One line bore all Arabs helpless to imitate. Muhammad was called Sorcerrer, bewitched, crazy. Do you think these titles are reasonable just because of a "text"?Even an Arab Christian would hold witness that it's "not normal". Again, even in western sources we can see that Muhammad was illiterate. Do you think an illiterate person can refer back to Hebrew or any other language? That's quite unlikely. Last, the Koran also contradicts Catholism. We read "They are disbelievers those who say that God is the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, when Jesus said: Children of Israel, worship God my lord and your lord, for whoever rejects this, then He has forbidden paradise on him". I tell you of these things because if you said this to a Muslim or a scholar in Islam he'd really think you're ignorant. That's why I thought you should know them so you won't fall into slips again. Mist |
||||||
7 | Who was the one to be sacrificed? | Gen 22:12 | mistknight | 36317 | ||
Mostly yes. But the argument they gave me spanned a chapter in the book I told you about. It's called "What did Jesus really say?". It's a huge 706 book which is actually eating up most of my time. There are other arguments they pose in this matter, but I'm not about to post a "chapter" here lol. If you would further like to help me, then contact me on my email. I'll send you the "whole (you'll regret this lol)" book and you can see it. It doesn't use as far as I've seen any sensoring language, because I immedietly dismiss such works. Nonetheless, it is a Muslim book on Christianity. So you can guess what you'll find in there. I can understand it if you don't want to. But you do seem to know quite enough about Christianity. Mist |
||||||
8 | Who was the one to be sacrificed? | Gen 22:12 | mistknight | 36315 | ||
Could you clarify that for me please? And do look at the original question, my arguments, Morant61's reply, and the reply I just finished typing right now back to him. Thanx | ||||||
9 | Who was the one to be sacrificed? | Gen 22:12 | mistknight | 36312 | ||
I find it ironic that you would think so. You can look at a previous line of messages I posted with the subject of Jesus/Joseph/Heli or Jesus/Joseph/Jacob. You will see that I have included a thanks for the help and the "satisfactory" answer I got. So I find it ironic that you would even question. Secondly, I can only tell you that being a person who has dedicated much of his life to the study to the relations between religions in general. But Islam and Christianity in particular, I've met with many Muslims and Christianis. Most of the questions I pose here were given to me by Muslims accompanied by the Koranic verses (and the ones given to me by Christians questioning the Koran I give to Muslim scholars). As an unbiased scholar I find it only elementry to ask those more knowledgable about Christianity of their religion, and about Islam of theirs. Thus refering it back to Muslims to appose their views, or to christians to appose theirs. That's why I demand detail from anyone, so my explanation would be satisfactory to the other side. I see no error in that. The other alternative if you wish is to tell Muslims that they're simply right in their accusations without asking people like you. Is that acceptable to you? I do concider the fact that I'll be hated by both Christians and Muslims, but you can't have it all lol. As for what I personally think. Then it'll remain nothing more than what I personally think. If you want I can give you the last "book" I recieved from Muslim scholars and I wouldn't mind you give me your replies to anything you can help me with clarifying. But that's another matter. Here's my email if you do want to discuss this matter more. mistknight@lycos.com Mist |
||||||
10 | Who was the one to be sacrificed? | Gen 22:12 | mistknight | 36154 | ||
You told me what the original word was in (Gen 22:12) but not what the original word was in (Gen 22:2). So could you tell me what the original word for that was? Also, where can I find a hebrew dictionary on the net? That's first. If what you said about "firstborn" as not meaning the phisically "firstborn" but who was blessed, then we should see this repeated tens of times in other situations, this however is not the case. Also, Ishmael was also blessed even before Isaac as you will see a bit later. Don't forget that in the three translations which I have seen, the same translation has been used, "Thine only son Isaac". In two verses not one. These translations are, KJV, RSV, and even the ASV. I find it quite strange that they would agree, especially that the RSV is presumably based on the "MOST" ancience manuscriptures. And the fact that Ishmael being the first born is concidered elementry. It didn't seem they had much doubt about what was written or how to translate it. As for God's covenant, we read in (Genesis 17:7-8) “And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in "their" generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.” In other words, Abraham's seed will recieve the covenant, "their", not his(Isaac) was used. This clearly means that none were excluded. He was curcumcised by Abraham which is a sign for God's covenant (Genesis 17:23) The question should now arise, is Ishmael concidered of Abraham's seed or not, well, the bible didn't leave that abstract? We read in (Genesis 21:13) "And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed." Unlike you stated in your answer to my question, Ishmael was blessed in many verses of the OT. Even before Isaac was even born. This is one of the verses stating this "And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation. (Genesis 17:20)" This all says straight out that Ishmael did inherit God's covenant. And I still don't have an answer to why "Thine only son" was used for Isaac when he was clearly not Abraham's only son at that time. I have yet to refer back to the original Hebrew manuscripts to see why this is the case. I'll also study the Koran more closely. Anything else you or anyone can add? Mist |
||||||
11 | Jesus/Joseph/Jacob?or Jesus/Joseph/Heli? | Bible general Archive 1 | mistknight | 36084 | ||
Thanks. I checked on it and I found that what you said is quite accurate. But there's a much more important topic I'm going to talk about. And I'll be happy to see you're answer to this question. Mist | ||||||
12 | Jesus/Joseph/Jacob?or Jesus/Joseph/Heli? | Bible general Archive 1 | mistknight | 36083 | ||
This sounds more accurate. I think that I get it now. Thanks for explaining this. I wish Mary's lineage was mentioned elsewhere. But now there is a much more important matter to discuss. I hope you'll see the new question I'll post. I'll really want your remarks on this one. Mist | ||||||
13 | Jesus/Joseph/Jacob?or Jesus/Joseph/Heli? | Bible general Archive 1 | mistknight | 36021 | ||
This is quite hard to accept. Even if Mathew was adressing the Jews (which surely is not mentioned anywhere around the text), then it would be improbible that he would distort Jesus' lineage. Even if what you said is the case, it is quite elementry to say that there is no mention here of anything that would imply that Mathew used Joseph in Jesus' lineage instead of Mary's name. What purpose would that serve? And why Joseph, not Jesus through Heli dirctly which would surly be much more acceptable with both Jews and Christians. Let's not forget that there is much in the NT which is totaly rejected by the Jews, it didn't seem that Mathew compromised in hundreds of other verses, why this? Don't forget: “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” 1 Thessalonians 5:21 and “For God is not [the author] of confusion” 1 Corinthians 14:33. |
||||||